Ok. the message on DU is clear. Be glad with what you might get, serf!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

83. I stand by each of those statements without apology.

The first words off your fingertips were fake outrage. Shall I list the rhetorical barbs that you have cast, including those you made before I had even addressed you?

Again, fake outrage.

But not a bit about economic theory.

I called out your patently absurd nonsense about machines doing all the unpleasant work as such machines do not exist. You have yet to actually address that counterpoint.

You are either being hypocritical about lamenting the lack of discussion of economic theory or you have conveniently forgotten that you yourself wrote in Post #42 --

I'm not going to explain economics to you. Maybe you can have the butler google it and read it to you so you don't even have to move.

Not one idea of how we can ease economic inequality - other than the thought that others should clean up your messes.

What mess did I create? By the way, are you still paying another human being to keep your city's sewage in check?

That would be from your initial line "Please show us the people who like crawling in sewers, digging ditches, breaking their backs in resource extraction jobs, etc. Yet these are all necessary occupations. Some people take jobs because they need the money and other people are willing to pay to have the unpleasant task performed by someone else"

And I continue to stand by what I said. Apart from having a case of the incoherent vapors you haven't addressed the point with a counterpoint.

Anyone fighting against economic inequality - they need to grow up, face the real world, not use fairy dust, are stupid, are an outrage, have make-believe solutions, more outrage, and fantasy. It couldn't possibly be that it is morally and ethically disgusting to prop up this economic system.

Okay. We get it. You're upset. But apart from abusing your poor computer's keyboard and wishing for machines that don't exist what does that have to do with the validity of what I stated?

Let me know when you're ready to discuss economic theory.

I'm aching to see something. Where is your explanation that refutes --

A) There are jobs to be done

B) Some people cannot/will not do those jobs

C) They will pay others to do those jobs

D) Others are willing to accept those jobs and that pay even though they do not like the job involved


And since you're so fond of your make-believe solution --

1) Where are your machines that will fill these jobs?

2) Why wouldn't a capitalist prefer automatons to humans?